Tribune, I was making two separate points about 1) Zoff and 2) The 3 main players in front of him. 1. Dino Zoff held the World Record for minutes without being scored against largely because of the men in front of him at Juve and the national team. 2. Scirea was arguably the equal of Baresi, Gentile simply locked strikers down, and Cabrini was one of the best in a long line of great Italian left backs. What I was getting at in all of this is that when Brazil has is unbalanced and almost exclusively offensive, and when Italy does the same defensively, neither wins the tournament. And Maradona's greatness should be measured against the defenses of Serie A, not Italy's national team, of course.
You were replying though to this statement "Italy BTW never won anything with those super-defenses: its big victory in WCs was with the 1982 offensive team of Paolo Rossi...". And technically King Kong is correct because you never had too many of those ON THE PITCH. Only ON PAPER. The only time when the fabled italian defense lived up to the expectations was 1990... and you failed to win. The last WC changed this a little bit, but for me this is not relevant simply because the last WC was a competition defense vs defense, not defense vs attack as it should have been. The lack of any offensive brilliance during the previous WC was at an all-time low, so practically there was very little challenges for the defenders. I suspected you made two separate points, but it was a "shot far off the target", because it has absolutely no relevance for what KK was saying. Besides, Brazil played defensively a la squadra azzura in 1974 or 1978 and won nothing, but they did it in 1994. So it wasn't exactly always exclusively offensive. The best defenders of Serie A were italians. (This is for general consumption, not directed at you Jerrito)The issues here are more complex than simply declaring than one league is better than the other, etc. For instance, the biggest success of Platini or Maradona came abroad, more exactly in the super-tough Serie A, not at home, in their "inferior" domestic leagues.A Maradona or Platini won close to nothing in France and Argentina.
I'm not sure I understand your last point. Of course those defenders were Italian. Again, my point is what does the Italian national team as a whole have to do with the greatness of Diego Armando Maradona??? I can understand most of the other arguments. But to say that he was not as good as Pele because Diego played against less skilled defenders is just not accurate in my opinion. Off topic Tribune - your knowledge of statistics and the history of the game is impressive.
Particularly with Diego, nothing. My argument was triggered by the fact that you seemed to suggest in your first post that Italy 1982 was a defensive monster (which it was not) and that you stated directly in your second one that Italy was always great defensively, while Brazil had mediocre defenses, which is a fallacious generalization. In fact, the italian defenses quite underperformed at WC level. The brazilian defenses were just as good, but they are extremely underrated, simply because they were overshadowed by their attacks. For instance, about 1958-1962, who was going to talk about the defensive prowess of a Nilton Santos, Djalma Santos, Bellini or De Sordi, when you had a Pele, Garrincha or Didi who dazzled the world with their offensive skills ? To summarize, my point was that you were exaggerating the strength of Italy's defenses and the weakness of the Brazilian ones, starting from their prefered style of playing (brazilians preferred to attack, that's true... but they could also defend very well). I never said this. In fact, I try to avoid such overall generalizations. But KingKong's claim was mostly a DEFENSIVE p) reaction against all the NUMEROUS claims made before that Maradona played against better opponents than Pele. Which is bullshitting. The one who wants (seriously, not just taking the piss) to determine whose opponents were superior is undertaking a task who will have absolutely no valid outcome.
I can see how me thinking that Maradona is the greatest, a player from a country that I've never set foot in isn't objective at all, compared to somebody from Rio saying Pele is the greatest. But what can I do you know? haha. By the way, you forgot to reply on the Romania/Italy match for Euro 2008, are you excited to be playing against a country who's league is of such a low, insignificant level?
Of course, I'm just noting that because the argument is often that Maradona led a team of mediocre players to the world cup. However, I do disagree on your comment that Pele's teammates cited as great players don't show up on Top 10 lists. Which one of them would you put at top 10 of all time? Even if you create a team with four players from top 30 players of all time, it makes a very strong team.
You originally cited N Ireland and claimed it to be Britain, a team that does not even exist. It's like me posting up the Paraguay squad from the last World Cup, and saying "Look S America are rubbish, I've never heard of their players". That England team of the 80s achieved as much as the Brazil of Zico etc (ie sod all). Laugh away. If you haven't heard of one of the world's great keeper it's you who is the joker. Who is over-rating it? I haven't even mentioned it.
You don't have to be from the same country for that. There are many people who never set foot in Brazil and their adoration for Ronaldo beats everything I heard from native brazilians. Do a check for the user "Ronaldooooo" and you will see. The level of bias is determined by the way you make your point, not where are you from. The fact that even the pro-Maradona people around here didn't have the courage to support your abberations that players from SA moved to Europe because they wanted to win the ECC it's quite suggestive (yes, even Bosterosoy, the poster who praised your pro-Maradona plagiarism - check the last pages of the Zidane/Riquelme to see his opinion on what determines a south-american to go to Europe : the shine of $$$). That's because I don't actually see the point. In 2004 you did not make it in the quarterfinals past Denmark and Sweden, in 2002 you lost to the "mighty" South Korea, but you won in 2006. This is football, you win some, you lose some. In 2008, Italy will play against Romania. You beat us in 2000, but you lost against us in 1983 (you know, that time when Serie A was the pinnacle of club football according to your statements ), when we shut the door of the Euro in the face of the newly crowned world champions. So what ? Assuming you will win, what's the big deal ?
JF, pardon me, please!... (& this post serves to some of El Pibe's fans in this Forum)... But (specially by being an Italian living in Inghilterra, the Boot's eternal rival, against whose mediochre defense El Pibe scored his 'Hand of God' and 'Century's' goals, and Italians happening to be even more patriotic and fanatic about football than the Argentinians themselves) - let's concede: At the bottom of your heart, you never REALLY 'thought' Maradona was the greatest ever!... Maradona was just a big historical pretext Italians found in order to see if, AT LAST, they could once and for all get rid of the ghost of the Big Black Guy that destroyed them in 1970 . You'll respond: why would we back Maradona since he was an Argie who beat us in a WC at our home, and even swore at us after all we gave him?... As if nobody knew Maradona's granma was Napolitan & had Italian blood in her veins, as most of the Argentinians!... Maradona image in Italy is of the 'daring immigrant', the 'heroic poor cousin' - an 'oriundo'! - who left his 'province' and came to try life in 'original' homeland. And, mainly because of that peninsular blood, he overcame all difficulties, and finally, SUCCEEDED in the Meca of defensive football. Thus, rewriting the biblical story of the dear buon figlio qui a la casa torna... Maradona was a retarded bomb* Italians smartly tried to 'plant' at the very craddle of The Brazilian Beast - South America - in order to dethrone it... And since he was 'an Argie', nothing could seem less 'unsuspicious' on the Italians part... In short, El Pibe was used - specially by the Italians - as The Last White Hope!... Exactly in the way Muhammad Ali referred to when a representative of the status quo - opportunistically elected by the establishment - showed up to dethrone him... And in that 'election' - they even used the Internet... And, worse, tried to shift the balls, by saying the 'establishment' guy was Pelé!... They failed. Pelé's myth has never been more solidly installed than today in the post of 'the man yet to be beaten'. More and more people get back to Pelé's, Maradona's & other great players' records - only logic and non-biased alternative way to resolve ANY 'dispute'... And see by themselves that the 'best player of the world' CANNOT BY NO MEANS have 4 World Cup titles & 1000 goals less than his most immediate adversary... As if it were little to just directly compare in footage the absolute difference of category between them... __________________________________________________________________ *RETARDED BOMB: "(...) A POORLY TOLD, or otherwise untenable, JOKE which, once told, lays there like an unexploded bomb while the jokester prays someone can come along to defuse the situation (...)" - Urban Dictionary
Besides, Tribune, You modestly didn't cite the case of Romania in the 1970 WC who gave Brazil one of the hardest-fought games of its history (2 x 3), while the defensively 'great' Italian NT fell on top of their 4 paws in one of the worst massacres in the entire history of football ... Just like their 'beloved' Argentina:
Man, Please, once and for all, decide yourself: Is (and here I'm using your own words) N. Ireland a team that had the 'world's great' players (Jennings, etc) or is just another "Paraguay' of life?... Besides who chose the wrong team was you, since Paraguay is a much more important football country... Take a look at their historical average rankings (FIFA.com data): (from Aug 1993 To Dec 2007) Paraguay - 32.194 N. Ireland - 79.831 From that we can easily imply that Paraguay is at least twice as much important to football as your Jennings' beloved N. Ireland... Yep, nothing ...
The two aren't mutually exclusive. Liberia were still crap when they had George Weah. The fact that Jennings played for Northern Ireland does not itself make them better than Paraguay. The fact that they produced a plethora of greats including George Best and Danny Blanchflower, and have twice gone further than Paraguay ever have despite having a population of under 2 million would suggest it though. Seriously I don't want to get into denigrating a country like Paraguay (a tiny country who punch well above their weight), just because you want to insult England or Northern Ireland. Talking to you is a waste of time.
Of course a 14 year period is reflective of their relative importance in the history of football The game has been played for 150 years, for most of that time N Ireland were superior to Brazil, let alone Paraguay. I know that alot of European fans get pulled up as arrogant and ignorant, but the same is equally true of S Americans.
Hey, don't twist the facts!... Who's insulting who?... It was you (and not me in relation to Ireland) who unelegantly associated the word 'rubbish' to 'Paraguay'. There is no way back for you, bud, don't try to fix things: you ALREADY ''denigrated' it... Besides if Paraguay is a 'tiny' country (with its 400 000 km²) what's then N. Ireland with its 13 000 km²?... N. Ireland has a small population (2 million)? So has Paraguay (6 million) - so what? Is that a proof of quality (or lack of?)... Didn't comment anything about the historical average rankings of both countries in the FIFA site! Why? ... Hmm, now you did; and arrived to the conclusion that N. Ireland is 'in the past' even superior to Brazil!!!... Would you give yourself the trouble to tell us...WHEN, Comme? Thanks for the collective laughter, mate ! ...
Was that before somebody brought a ball to Brazil??? I've heard the Irish saved civilization, but not this.
Man, Hit the nail!... I just solved the meaning of Stonehenge: those are not monuments that you see in a circle!... http://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imagem:Stonehenge_Wide_Angle.jpg It's a whole stadium, with posts and all!... What only proves their passion for football: imagine the effort in placing those huge boulders on top of the other!... That also explains why their football is so 'physical'! ...
kingkong: the "half of 150 years" statement is uncharacteristically hyperbolic for comme, he remains arguably the best and most knowledgeable source on this site for history of the game along with names such as Gregoriak and tpmazembe among others. You would do well to take his posts more seriously and to not treat him as another JJF. Keep in mind his posts on Paraguay have been responses to your, very poorly written, posts on England (or, mistakenly, N. Ireland) and you have taken them. For example, he did not use teh word rubbish to describe Paraguay. He used it as a way of comparing how you were talking about N. Ireland to how someone else with a similar attitude might talk about Paraguay. I suggest you read through his posts again but without ignoring the context they were responding to and you might find them to be valid criticisms of how you jumped from one post to the next without ever properly rectifying your mistakes first. A little reading comprehension goes a long way. Finally, I think you show too much bias in the last few pages and this leads me to believe you are now dismissing most arguments as JJF-level stuff and not taking the same trouble you did before to respond to other posters. Don't let that happen and you'll be on your way to becoming one of the better history posters here, a group which I am always eager to read new posts from.
I'm just curious as to why you said Rio here instead of Brazil. Do you identify Pelé with Rio and if so why?
It has nothing to do with colour or nationality. Diego is an Argentinian mestizo.... I'm not, neither are other Neapolitan or wider Italian blood people in Europe, so you can't play the race card and make out that this is a case of Pele the poor repressed black man. Diego is known to be of some Croatian background too. Also Italians and Argentines whine about each other too, don't you remember the 1990 World Cup where Diego called the people of Rome "sons of whores" and all that drama for Argentina knocking Italy out in the semi-finals? This is hardly Italy and Argentina holding hands and dancing around in a hippy love circle, Diego is just that damn good so it doesn't matter what his nationality is... even if he was French or Albanian, it wouldn't change a thing. Diego played against Italy not for them, against Italy you are the oposition and everything will be done by the men of the field to stop the other side from winning. Full stop. There is know "ooooh, so your great, great grandmother moved from Italy to Argentina?? here have a free goal!". You and other Brazilians tear Maradona down, because you are born in a position to be systematically bias against him, if he was born in Brazil instead of Argentina you'd push old man Pele aside, with his fraudulent goals record and accept Diego as your saviour. Argies and Brazilians are both bias against each others main star, so when its put to the rest of the world to give their stance, just about only England and its media (a country who’s national team Diego raped and the Falklands issue is not that distant) seem to think Pele and the Brazilian football myth is best, look how well that stance has served the youth system in England with their ridiculous training regimes. I have come to like Argentine football because of Diego, not the other way around, so no way am I bias in terms of national alligences for El Pibe De Oro, like you are when it comes to Pele. When it comes to Brazil I freely give credit where its due, Garrincha was their greatest footballer and this interests me greatly (yes I'd even pretend Pele was the greatest for that)...
As Ombak pointed out, no I didn't. I was making a comparison to your error over England and Norther Ireland. Neither. It is a sign of how well Northern Ireland have done to produce such a high calibre of players. Northern Ireland is a tiny place as well. Your historical average rankings are ridiculous. N Ireland had played the game for 50 years before Paraguay even played an international game.
I dont know about Platini, but for Maradona, the part in bold is laughable. Tell anybody in Argentina that Maradona accomplished 'nothing' in Argentina and they will laugh in your face for so long. Your right, Maradona never won anything with Argentinos Juniors, but Argentinos is not a big club at all and despite this, Maradona always had them in contention in a league that had a brilliant Boca Juniors team (Libertadores champ in 77 and 78) and a River Plate team with many stars (Passarella in his prime as we went over before) and many other teams (remember, back then most of the 78 WC Champs in Argentina were playing for Argentinian clubs). They even finished second in 1980 Then, Maradona went to Boca (he could have gone to Europe but wanted to play a season in Boca first) and won the league title. He made his debut in Argentinos Juniors 10 days before turning 16 (an insane record because unlike today, back then not many players made it into their South American clubs at such an early age as they do nowadays). In 1978, 1979, and 1980, he was the top goalscorer in every Metropolitano. In 1979 and 1980, he was top goalscorer in the Nacional. He is the only player in the history of Argentinian football to lead the league in scoring for 5 tournaments. In those years he was also the ARgentina's Football Writers' player of the year. In 1979 he won the first of many South American Footballer of the Year awards. He had already scored 144 goals in a mere 206 games before going to Barcelona. So unsuccessful, I don't think so
I'm not going to quote the whole thing but that quote has to be possibly the most irrational and stupid thing that I have read in a very long time